Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Where sinonasal tumors in dogs come back after radiation therapy
By Poirier, Valerie J et al.·Published in Journal of veterinary internal medicine·2021·School of Veterinary Science·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Patterns of local residual disease and local failure after intensity modulated/image guided radiation therapy for sinonasal tumors in dogs.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 22 dogs with sinonasal tumors (SNT) received radiation therapy to treat their condition. Unfortunately, many of these dogs experienced local disease progression, with 75% of the treatment failures occurring within the area that was supposed to be treated. This suggests that the tumors may have had resistant areas that didn't respond well to the radiation. While the treatment aimed to shrink the tumors, the results indicate that some dogs still had residual disease or recurrence despite therapy.
People also search for: dog sinonasal tumor treatment · radiation therapy for dogs · why is my dog having nosebleeds
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Most dogs with sinonasal tumors (SNT) treated with radiation therapy (RT) died because of local disease progression. HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVES: Our hypothesis is that the majority of local failure and residual disease would occur within the radiation field. ANIMALS: Twenty-two dogs with SNT treated with RT. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study. INCLUSION CRITERIA: dogs with SNT receiving 10 daily fractions of 4.2 Gy with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT)/image guided radiation therapy (IGRT) and follow-up cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Each CBCT was registered with the original radiation planning CT and the gross tumor volume (GTV) contoured. The GTV was classified as residual (GTVr) or a failure (GTVf). The dose statistic for each GTV was calculated with the original IMRT plan. For GTVf, failures were classified as "in-field," "marginal," or "out-field" if at least 95, 20-95, or less than 20% of the volume of failure was within 95% (D95) of the total prescription dose, respectively. RESULTS: There were 52 follow-up CBCT/CTs. Overall there was a GTVr for 20 dogs and GTVf for 16 dogs. The majority of GTVr volume was within the original GTV. GTVf analysis showed that 75% (12/16) were "in-field," 19% (3/16) were "marginal" and 6% (1/16) were "out-field." CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: In-field failures are the main pattern for local recurrence, and there is evidence of radioresistant subvolumes within the GTV.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33660342/